Do you support the second amendment?


Yes, thank goodness that constitutional conservatives and true classical liberals have been there to fight against this marginalizing.
It is important to recognize that the use of the word men in the Dof I should always be understood as the same usage as in the Nicene Creed


did you also think flight was only for men? The word “man” is right there in “manned” so it obviously means men, and men only…right?:roll_eyes:

emphasis in the second quote is my addition.


If we are going to use equivalency, since there were no airports in 250 years ago, would Republicans be equally on board with a list of people prohibited to travel by other means, say foot traffic, from town to town without due process? That is more apples to apples than saying flying is not a protected right. Is travel in general something we have the right to, or can that be suspended without due process?


That’s the problem. People use weapons to harm others even if those weapons were made for something else. You can ban everything and killing will still happen. This is an optimization problem.


I was referencing the repeaters… although, now that you bring it up, why is it that all the movies depict the colonial militias as firing the same weapons as the British military (muskets)?

Maran atha!



Hear hear!

Truthful and direct. Quite a lance you wrote here.


You know what the road to hell is paved with…


let me guess…shotgun shells?


Nope. Strike One.


He just doesn’t buy the straw-men and slippery slopes.

And good lord, all the hand-waving… :roll_eyes:


I hear how powerful the NRA lobbying is, but when one looks at the dollars, they seem to be small players, not only in lobbying but also in contributions.

As for “shady back room deals”, a source please.



This post, I can agree with :slight_smile:


NRA influence -

NRA Scandal -

More scandal


They don’t. Yu see them firing flintlocks, which is the common ignition system of the era, but they are not the same weapons. The militias used primarily rifles and shotguns.

The French did later supply the Americans with Charleville muskets, similar to the Brown Bess’s used by the British. Those were used by some Continental regulars.


Read the article, wasn’t impressed.

The problem with the gun control debate is this: Republican politicians do a HORRIBLE job defending their position because they never mention the reason because they don’t want to give crazy people a green light.

The question about gun control is this: the Second Amendment is intended to protect us from whom? Criminals or the Govt?

Republicans currently (yes, the party was not always controlled by conservatives - Nixon was not a conservative) accepts the position of James Madison, George Mason, Alexander Hamilton, etc in that the 2nd Amendment is meant to protect the people from the govt.

Alexander Hamilton wrote in Federalist 28 that “if the representatives of the people betray their constituents, there is then no recourse left but in the exertion of that original right of self-defense,” a right which he declared to be “paramount.”

Republican politicians hurt their argument because they do not flat out state they view it as a right to protect themselves against the govt. Because the idea that you need to have guns for sport or need AR-15’s to hunt deer is insane. But the idea that you need AR-15s to protect yourself against the govt and to start an insurgency against the federal govt is legit.

But, I doubt you will hear any Republican politicians publicly say, I favor the keeping semi-automatics legal because we might need them to fight another civil war. However, that is the real reason.

Now, with that said, I do agree that private owners have a right to ban guns in the places in places of business (stores, stadiums, malls, etc) and that cities and states have the right to ban guns in state owned buildings – including schools and universities.

God Bless


They don’t. YOu see them firing flintlocks, but they are not the same weapons. The militias used primarily rifles and shotguns.

The French did later supply the Americans with Charleville muskets, similar to the Brown Bess’s used by the British. Those were used by some Continental regulars.


The question is what to do about evil. Passing laws is a superficial, feel good, completely ineffective means of doing that. Gun laws were tightened in 1968, placing an onerous burden only upon the law abiding. As a former federally licensed firearms dealer, I can attest to that. With the passing of each new gun law, crime increases. Ponder that. As to preventing a calculating criminal from eventually carrying out a horrific act, that is impossible.

With hundreds of millions of guns and trillions of rounds of ammunition in private US hands, if gun owners were the problem you would know it.

The criminal human heart is the problem, and there are the 10 ancient laws to cover that.


While criminals will always be a problem, as a reasonable man it’s not unreasonable to ban bumps or kits that can turn a semiauto into fully auto. No one should be able to kill that many people that fast with a legal firearm. Those firearms should not be legal. There HAS to be some kind of mandatory waiting period and also ways to close gun show loopholes which circumvent the waiting and paperwork process. No one should have a gun with any type of violent or domestic abuse conviction, etc.

more common sense rules:
• We must ban and criminalize the possession of automatic weapons!
• We must close loopholes such as buying a weapon at a gun show!
• We must ban the purchase of firearms and ammunition on the internet!
• We must increase the waiting period and make background checks more rigorous and effective!
• We must limit the number of firearms any individual can own!
• We must limit the number of bullets any firearm clip can hold!
• We must ban and criminalize the purchase and possession of armor piercing bullets, and also hollow-tip bullets!
• We must rethink the “logic” of permitting concealed weapons, especially in places like houses of worship, colleges, bars, restaurants, and political rallies!
• We must interface all data bases monitoring firearm ownership to assess the firearm-owning population more accurately and effectively!


Nope. It’s a very valid point.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit